‘The effects of landmines are unbelievable. It’s one of the worst blows to a human, the shock of your limb severed by an explosion that throws you in the air. You gradually recover consciousness and realise you’ve lost your limb.

‘Often the nearest hospital is miles away. You have to be carried by siblings or neighbours. Many victims die en route to where they’re going for help. For those who survive, there’s a lack of services or care.’

The international Mine Ban Treaty was adopted in Norway 15 years ago. Handicap International was one of several international organisations who campaigned for landmines to be banned. The group was a joint winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Mine Ban Treaty was signed by 122 nation states in Canada in December 1997, all agreeing to stop the production and use of landmines and to destroy their stockpiles.

It was a landmark achievement, banning a conventional weapon that had been accepted as a part of conflicts around the world for decades. Today, 15 years on, 160 UN states are signed up, including Britain.

However, 34, including the US, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and Iran, still refuse to sign.

‘Many people contend that having 34 countries still not signing the treaty is proof of its weaknesses and failures,’ said Mr Richardier. But the treaty has been a clear success.

‘In the past, it was a legal, conventional weapon,’ he said. ‘Today, it’s a weapon that’s considered banned and illegal. Anyone dealing in the weapon or moving it around, it’s immediately stigmatised, especially if it’s a democracy.’ Between 1999 and 2011, 90m stockpiled anti-personnel mines were destroyed.

There’s been an international effort to clear areas around the world of mines.‘Since the turn of the century, worldwide, around 4,000 square kilometres have been cleared,’ said Mr Richardier, ‘which is more than twice the surface of London. That shows the magnitude of the problem and also the difficulty of getting back to a mine free world.’

With the clearances has come a remarkable decrease in the number of victims. ‘In the early 1990s, there was an estimated average of 25,000 new victims per year. Around the turn of the century there was around 8,000. In 2010, there were 4191, of which 75 per cent are civilians still. There are five times less victims. It’s saved so many lives,’ said Mr Richardier.

But there are still worrying signs. Although the numbers of casualties around the world have been reduced, about 4,200 people were killed or injured by landmines last year, the first increase in nearly a decade.

Armed forces have continued to use mines in recent times, from the Chechnya conflict to, more recently, the Arab Spring, with evidence of mines being laid in Libya, Syria and Yemen.

In 2010, more than 170m anti-personnel mines were still being stockpiled in dozens of countries, mainly by states that are not signatories to the treaty.

The number of landmine casualties is expected to be higher again this year.

The weapon is carefully and deliberately designed to create maximum damage, said Mr Richardier, who has seen the effects on civilian and refugee populations in Cambodia, Mozambique, Rwanda and elsewhere.

‘If you go on the internet you’ll find the merits and benefits of those weapons in the adverts used to present them to potential buyers. It was fine tuned to wound without killing. Having wounded people is terrible for morale, it takes a lot of energy to care for the wounded, it’s a drain on resources and it’s an element of built-in terror. That was part of the sales pitch from companies who produced these weapons. That was part of the sales pitch.’

Amos Muhindo fought in the civil war in Uganda during the late 1990s. He survived, but lost six members of his family. After the war, while working in one of his fields, he stepped on a mine left by rebel forces. His leg was torn off.

‘They should send the guys who produce those damned mines here,’ he told Metro. ‘They should see what they did to us.’ Mr Muhindo was forced to give up farming. His fields, yet to be de-mined, are still unsafe. Walking and other parts of daily life are difficult. ‘I will be the happiest man in the world when there are no longer any mines in any countries,’ he said.

There’s still work to do to get the remaining countries on board. US president Barack Obama , like George W Bush before him, has refused to sign up. Mr Richardier believes that without the influential US, it’s harder to get other remaining countries to sign.

‘The US is the alibi to the staunch position from countries where democracy is still in progress.

‘When you have the United States on one side, you can never hope to have China or Russia. I believe China will join the treaty at some point. A lot has to do with the level of acceptability in the international position. There should be a point where the international exposure of not signing the treaty, which is accepted by the vast majority of other countries, creates pressure. If the United States shifted sides, it’s not impossible that a country like China, which is trying to become more respected and respectable internationally, might make the right calculation and say, “Why not give up this weapon?”

‘The serious hope is that the Democrats will win the US election and Obama will join the treaty. That nearly happened two years ago. We believed there was an implied pledge from President Obama.

‘If he wins a new term, he might be a bit bolder. Definitely if the US signed up it would make a real change. When America has shifted sides, we’ll be nearer to the universalisation of countries against landmines.’